In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Constitution no longer followed. Dead letter.
“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”
*****
You’re trying to make an Old America point there, this New America.
In New America being “confronted with the witnesses against him” doesn’t mean the defendant gets to know who they are, see their face, or hear their unscrambled voice, nor does he even need to be able to ask the witness any questions.
The defendant is being “confronted” by the anonymous taped testimony.
I seriously doubt they will actually be unknown to the defendant and her lawyers. I think what they are talking about here is that they’d be able to testify anonymously, that is, not be identified to the press and public.